Y. SRINIVAS Vs. S. JAYARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in R.A. No. 166/2007 dated 3.11.2009 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, reversing the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 223/2006 dated 31.7.2007 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & JMFC, Devanahalli. The appellant is the plaintiff in the suit and the respondent is the defendant. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their respective ranking before the trial Court. The plaintiff filed the above suit for declaration that he has the absolute right over the schedule property and for certain other incidental reliefs. The case of the plaintiff is that in the year 1963, one Narasimhaiah was granted 4 acres of land in Sy. No. 87 of Arasinakunte village. He has sold the said property under a registered sale-deed dated 20.11.1964 in favour of Ahmed Khan for valuable consideration. Ahmed Khan had also purchased the lands in Sy. No. 87 at different blocks from certain other persons. It is further contended by the plaintiff that his paternal uncle Byrappa had purchased land measuring 26 acres in different blocks in Sy. No. 87 from Ahmed Khan under a registered sale-deed dated 27.11.1968 for valuable consideration. Since then Byrappa was in possession and enjoyment of the said 26 acres of land. The father of the plaintiff along with his brother partitioned the said properties. In the said partition, the father of the plaintiff, namely, Erappa was allotted 4 acres of land in Sy. No. 87 block No. 69, new No. 124 of Arasinakunte village. After purchase of the property by Byrappa, his name was entered in the revenue records both at kathedhar and cultivator's column. Byrappa died intestate leaving behind plaintiff as his successor. Since then, plaintiff has been is in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The katha of the said property was changed into his name. He is raising crops in the said property. Now, he has grown Neelagiri trees in the said property. On 14.7.1991 at about 11.00 a.m., the defendant along with his henchmen threatened him and began to cut the Neelagiri trees. In this connection, he has lodged a police complaint against the defendant. However, Police did not take any action against him. After verification of the records at that Tahsildar's office, he came to know that sale certificate has been issued by the Assistant Commissioner in favour of the defendant in respect of the suit schedule property.

(2.) The defendant has filed the written statement contending that Narasimhaiah had acquired 4 acres of land in Arasinakunte village in the year 1963. Narasimhaiah failed to pay the land revenue in respect of the suit property for a number of years. The tax collecting authority had initiated proceedings for recovery of arrears of land revenue. Even after that, he had not paid the arrears of land revenue. The Tahsildar had initiated proceedings for collection of arrears of land revenue by public auction of the suit schedule property. In the said public auction, the defendant purchased the said 4 acres of land. The Assistant Commissioner has issued a registered sale certificate in favour of the defendant on 26.6.1974. Thus, the defendant is the owner of the suit schedule property.

(3.) On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court has framed the following issues: